2
On September 16, 2013, Kruger filed this unlawful detainer complaint against
Appellants, by which she sought possession of the premises, restitution, and damages.
Appellants filed a verified answer denying allegations and alleging various affirmative defenses.
A court trial was held on October 17, 2013, at the conclusion of which the court found in
favor of Kruger. Judgment in her favor for possession and damages, plus attorney fees and
costs, in the total amount of $10,298.81 was entered the next day.
On October 30, 2013, Appellants filed a motion to vacate the judgment. The court heard
and denied the motion on November 13, 2013.
On November 8, 2013, Appellants filed a petition for relief from judgment as it declared
a forfeiture of the lease agreement. The court heard and denied the petition on November 20,
2013. Appellants appealed from the judgment, which is appealable under Code of Civil
Procedure section 904.2, subdivision (a), that same day.
DISCUSSION
I. Timeliness of the Appeal
A notice of appeal in a limited civil case must be filed on or before the earliest of: (1) 30
days after the trial court clerk mails a notice of entry of judgment or a file-endorsed copy of the
judgment with a proof of service attached; (2) 30 days after the party filing the notice of appeal
serves or is served with a notice of entry of judgment or a file-endorsed copy of the judgment
with proof of service attached; or (3) 90 days after the entry of judgment. (Cal. Rules of Court,
rule 8.822(a).)
Here, the judgment was entered on October 18, 2013. The record does not show that
Appellants were ever served with a notice of entry of judgment or a file-endorsed copy of the
judgment with proof of service attached. Their notice of appeal therefore had to have been filed
within 90 days from entry of judgment on October 18, 2013. The notice of appeal having been
filed on November 20, 2013, it is timely. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.822(a).)
II. Issues on Appeal/Standard of Review
Appellants contend that service of the three-day notice to pay rent or quit was premature
and void as a matter of law and that it also violated a specific provision of the lease.